Opinionline: Susan Rice makes a 'classic exit'

Dec. 13, 2012
|

U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice / Spencer Platt, Getty Images

by USA TODAY

by USA TODAY

Michael Hirsh,National Journal: "It was a classic exit: stealthy and swift, with few fingerprints. President Obama didn't want to be seen as backing down. So Susan Rice -- one of his most devoted aides since 2007 -- gave him the way out, seemingly all on her own. ‚?¶ This was all the part intended for public consumption. The underlying reality is this: The president is almost certainly furious about this turn of events -- which represents the first major defeat he's suffered since his re-election -- but he's a savvy enough politician to know how to back off without seeming to back down."

Seth Mandel,Commentary: "Now that Rice has apparently withdrawn her name from consideration to be secretary of State ‚?¶ the criticism of Rice's undiplomatic style would seem to be complements when coming from conservatives. But I fear an important point is being lost: this criticism was not coming from the right, by and large. The attacks on Rice's disposition have been driven by the left. Indeed, what is remarkable about the controversy over Rice is how thoroughly the left took command of it -- and greatly expanded the effort to prevent her nomination‚?¶ It should not go unnoticed that Hillary Clinton made her opposition to Rice clear to officials in Washington."

Michael Tomasky , Daily Beast: "Well, I think that's sad. But it means, obviously, that the White House was getting the signals that she didn't have the votes. No Senate, at least no modern Senate, has ever voted down a secretary of State choice. That Republicans were prepared to do that is just disgusting. Over a few sentences spoken on some television shows? Rice had other issues, it should be noted in fairness. ... She has plenty of critics at Foggy Bottom. So there are some Democrats out there who are happy about this tonight, too. I still think it would be way too risky of Obama to name John Kerry."

Sam Stein and Joshua Hersh, Huffington Post: "As President Obama's presumed nomination of Rice for secretary of State continues to face controversy over the administration's handling of the consulate attack in Benghazi, there is growing concern among top Democrats that Obama may turn to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., as his fallback choice. The concerns have nothing to do with Kerry's ability to handle the Foggy Bottom post. Nearly everyone agrees that he has the intellectual acumen and experience for the job. Instead, Democrats said they worry that Republicans may be using the secretary of state fight as a roundabout way to regain a Senate seat the GOP lost this fall, when Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., was defeated by Elizabeth Warren. The anti-Rice gambit, some Democrats said, has the feel of a Republican long con."

Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC: "I think this had become sort of an impossible challenge for her to be confirmed, that she realized that, the White House realized it as well. I think they know they are on good political solid ground, as you were just pointing out. This is not going to help Republicans at all, the fact that a woman and a woman of color has been forced out of a confirmation process even before she was nominated."

Michael Crowley, Swampland, Time: "There's a view that politics and national security should be oil and water -- that some iron rule of Washington should make the two impossible to mix. In reality, it doesn't work that way. Even so, Rice's removal of her name from consideration to be Barack Obama's next secretary of State is what happens when the fallout from a genuine national security disaster runs headlong into the electrified domestic politics of an election year. It's hard to know whether the United Nations ambassador truly reached this conclusion on her own, or whether she accepted the White House's view that, with the nation's fiscal future in the balance, this is no time for an ugly confirmation fight with Republicans. But Rice was surely correct when she said, in a public letter to the president, that 'the confirmation process would be lengthy, disruptive and costly' to the president's priorities. 'The tradeoff,' she added, 'is simply not worth it to our country.' "

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.